On Thursday 13 December 2007 19:25, Aaron J. Seigo wrote:
> > The point is that some applications are ALREADY waiting for inclusion
> > since July/07! That is why I think a release in April makes sense, it
> 4 months after 4.0? that's 2.5 months of development time at best. seems
> rather short.
Indeed that's too short. We'll again have not enough time to implement new 
features and we'll need to set up again "exemptions", "exceptions", etc. 
Again we'll need "properly marketed" release. Why are we trying to rush? 
What's the reason to rush?

> > After 4.1, we should probably experiment with the 6 month release
> > schedule that seems to be working for other projects,
>
> for certain values of "working". for at least one major project, there was
> an immediate and noticeable decline in both mailing list traffic and commit
> rates when a 6 month cycle was adopted.
>
> i'd sooner see us (loosely) sync along with the Qt dev cycle (which has
> become much more regular, ~9 month per release) to keep a steady flow of
> feature / bug fixes going between KDE and Qt.

9 months sounds like much better than 6 months. Not only because of longer 
time for feature development, but because of longer beta/RC cycles to polish 
features and fix more bugs. In one word, I'd prefer us releasing more 
featureful and stable software.
_______________________________________________
release-team mailing list
release-team@kde.org
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/release-team